Report from California - EFFORTS TO APPORTION EV'S

[sandersadu]

I know we're all focused on Nov. 2, but there are storm clouds brewing.

Word is that the Republicans, with Schwarzenegger's blessing are going to try to get an Initiative on the ballot to apportion California's EV's. (If it's good enough for Colorado and Maine, why not California?) This ballot initiative would be on the Fall 2006 ballot for the Fall 2008 Presidential Election.

For you non-Californians, it is ridiculously easy to get initiatives on the ballot, see Recall Vote. If this passes, game over folks. It means a PERMANENT REPUBLICAN MAJORITY.

Sorry no link, but I heard on a KGO radio in San Francisco. We have to alert the State and National parties to these nascent efforts and stamp them out.

You heard it here first.

[bluestateguy]

1. If this was done nationwide, I would support it

But all this will do is effectively make Texas the biggest prize in the electoral college.

[LoverOfLiberty]

10. Therein lies the key to defeating this

We cannot allow Texas to have more influence than California!

[krkaufman]

11. Agreed. I support the concept -- but not unilaterally. n/t

[yardwork]

2. Not if every other state does it too

Although I can see how the southern states would try to hang onto the "all or nothing" rule, in which case the country would have a permanent Republican majority in elections.

However, I think it more likely that it would turn the tide away from electoral college voting entirely, in which case we would have a permanent Democratic majority!

Nobody disputes that Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000.

[Perky]

exactly (N/T)

[Renew Deal]

3. The Dems in the state should be able to kill that.

[sandersadu]

7. State Dems

I think that your confidence in the California State Dem. party is unwarranted.

Remember this is the same gang that (1) thought the recall wouldn't pass; (2) thought Schwarzenegger wouldn't run; and (3) thought Schwarzenegger woudln't win.

DUMB.

Also they had a chance to get Gray Davis to resign and Bustamante would have been Governor. A Hispanic Governor for the biggest state in the Union. If that had happened, Bustamante, not the Gropenfuhrer would have had coattails, and we'd be winning Arizona, Nevada and Colorado handily by now.

[Warren DeMontague]

9. The Gropenfuhrer doesn't have coattails.

Before you slam the CA state Dem. Party too much, why don't you keep in mind that we've got 2 solid senators. A solid (D) legislature. We have a solid, predictable block of 55 electoral votes that Kerry can bank on. And we have also provided quite a bit of manpower and financial support to the Kerry campaign.

Should Davis have resigned? Maybe. But the guy didn't do anything wrong. It might have been a smart thing to do, but it would have been unprecedented. I agree that the recall caught us unawares. But Gray Davis didn't help things himself, by alienating his base, pissing off (D) members of the legislature, and having- frankly- the personality of stale bread. And the press still continues to underreport how Enron deliberately SCREWED us while Arnold was having secret meetings with Ken Lay. Again, sooner or later Arnold will have to answer for these things in a legitimate election.

[Zhade]

31. I guess it depends on what you mean by "solid".

Considering that both Senators Boxer and Feinstein voted for John "Death Squad Fan #1!" Negroponte to be ambassador to Iraq, and Feinstein voted for the war at the same time her husband owned weapons contractor stock...

[Warren DeMontague]

41. Okay, then, vote for Bill Jones if Boxer is so unacceptable.

Jesus, there's no pleasing some people.

[Zhade]

47. Yeah, how dare I condemn voting for an Iran-Contra figure!

I mean, Jesus, there really is no pleasing people like me who think that it's a bad idea to place a man who allowed death squads to murder thousands on his watch into a position of power in the country we're illegally occupying!

I should be burned at the stake!

[Warren DeMontague]

65. Okay, then, send her an email.

Beyond that, I'm not sure what you want ME to do about it. I spent the better half of the 80s yelling to anyone who would listen about Iran-Contra. I tend to think ANYTHING this administration does in Iraq, not to mention the rest of the world, is shady and illegal and immoral and probably loaded with High Fructose Corn Syrup, to boot.

However...

Barbara Boxer is up for re-election this year. I don't know about you, but as far as I'm concerned she's one of the BEST voices in the US Senate. Do I agree with her 100% of the time? No. But I am generally very proud to have her as my senator. At least she's not Rick Santorum.

[Zhade]

66. I have. And I'm not asking you to do anything.

We're cool, my friend. I have no beef with you. I'm just expressing my frustration and disappointment in the two senators allegedly elected to do good for their constituents.

They do a lot of good (at least, Boxer does), but they've made some really bad decisions, I think.

PS: Nice 'high-fructose corn syrup' reference. I despise the stuff myself. :)

[Warren DeMontague]

67. Fair enough.

I suspect that in the Senate people have to pick their battles, but too often that bleeds over into political expediency.

Hell, even my US Rep- who is far enough to the left that I agree with her almost all the time-- absolutely enraged the f*ck out of me by voting along with pretty much the entire rest of the gummint on that stupid resolution affirming the pledge of allegience... during that whole "Under God" flap. Now, I'm an atheist; I thought it was wrong to have to say that when I was a kid, 30 years ago... but I do understand that the reality is, whether something is right or not, for a congressmember to vote against something like that is to open him or herself up to stupid charges of being "against the pledge". Throw in some kid sobbing and a flag waving in the background, and you've got a 30 second political hit piece. "Why won't Representative Flooblefarb let our kids say the pledge?"

Shit, we're seeing this all over the place in this campaign; Kerry says something about "global test", and never mind the context of what he was saying, the GOP jumps all over it- "global test! he said global test!"

Now, how something like that translates into a vote for the Iran-Contra thug Negroponte as Iraq ambassador, I'm not sure. I know Senators have to pick their battles. But on the face of it, I agree with you-- it does sound like a very bad vote.

[umtalal]

34. Davis ran a dirty campaign. In the end that worked against him because

he forced us to chose between the dumb and dumber. I HATE THAT MENTAL MIDGET ARNOLD. I HATE HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

[Warren DeMontague]

42. Davis alienated the base. He did. He was hard to defend.

He took the fall for Enron, (explain to me why Ken Lay isn't in jail yet, again?) but Davis didn't do himself any favors by alienating the base and working against the dems in the legislature.

But we will get a chance to deal with Arnold in 2006. Shit, if anyone wants to recall the guy before that, I'm all set to get out there with petitions. But we have other things to worry about this year. And all this thread does is give a chance for the inevitable "Yeah-- what the hell is up with you god-damn Californians????" crowd to come out of the woodwork--- like they always do. Therefore as someone who is particularly PROUD of my state and the CRUCIAL CONTRIBUTION it is making towards a KERRY VICTORY (which is why I'm here, at least!) in this current election, I happen to think it's massively counterproductive.

[umtalal]

49. I am with you in thinking doubting California is highly counterproductive.

[gardenista]

16. I second that!

I called the state Dem party offices six weeks before the recall vote, to ask them what we should do to ensure that the Gropenator did not come to be. They said that they were still deciding what to do!!!!! And to call back in two weeks!!!!!!!!

This state was let down mightily by our Dem leadership, especially Ms. Feinstein.

We need to fight this NOW!

[umtalal]

35. Love Boxer. Hate Feinstein ( our Liebrman version)

[Warren DeMontague]

I think it's a stretch to say she's as bad as Lieberman.

n/t

[umtalal]

50. She is almost always over the fence in important democratic issues.

If it was not for the petitions and phone calls the woman would not move. Another awful dem. is J. herman. But Fienstein and ohter are for antother time and place

[Warren DeMontague]

63. Well, as an ex-Marinite, I'm very proud of Barbara Boxer.

She's not perfect, but I usually agree with her.

Feinstein's not my fave, I agree. But at least she's a Democrat, she's pro-choice, and as someone with a handicapped neice, I'm particularly glad that she vocally supports stem cell research.

[troubleinwinter]

12. Uh, the state that brought you

Ronald Regan, Pete Wilson, George Deukmejian, and Arnold??? Well, OK, Nixon wasn't governor.

[Warren DeMontague]

39. Uh... What is it with knee jerk CA Bashing...

I can set my watch by it.

........Again, you don't want our 55 EVs?

Really, I think half of it is east coasters jealous about the weather. Let it go.

Check out how much energy and money we've poured into the Kerry campaign before you start that shit... thank you very much.

[troubleinwinter]

68. Ummmm.... I am a Californian

Born here and have lived here for 53 years. Sorry, but what I said was the truth.

[Heath.Hunnicutt]

4. I want Texas to go first.

[Steelangel]

5. I repeatedly warn people around here and different places

about california and its voting issues but have anyone ever listen to me? nooooo.

now that shit drop on our pants..

[DuaneBidoux]

6. It's Just Plain Time to dump EC period!

Even if somehow Kerry were to get in without winning popular support I would hope he would start moving it forward to get rid of EC. It's an anachronism that has far outlived its time. It insures that people in states like mine (Texas) get ignored.

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Warren DeMontague]

8. Yeah, Arnold Carries a lot of weight, doesn't he....

Given the reaming that Bill Jones is sure to get from Barbara Boxer.

Let's keep in mind that the guy hasn't even been through a *normal* election cycle.

California isn't Colorado. Or Maine, In case you haven't noticed.

California has a solid Dem. Majority. I don't believe people- the majority- will want to dilute that power electorially. Let's worry about this year now, before getting worked up about some asshat idea being spread on Right Wing Radio. Frankly, I think Arnold has more to worry about in 2006 than we do.

[sandersadu]

14. Don't get too complacent

First of all, KGO is not right-wing radio, if anything it's left of center.

Second, I know we have a huge majority in the state legislature, and 2 Senators, but they were also there for the Recall. Enough said.

Finally, all initiatives need to pass is clever marketing. Remember, California passed Prop 209 and 187, getting rid of Affirmative Action, and race-baiting against Hispanics, respectively.

The PR campaign would be deceptively simple, and frankly would have some appeal: "To make your vote count, apportion votes" (trading on the meme that California is ignored, and this would force politicians to address California issues.

Please don't underestimate the appeal of this argument.

[Warren DeMontague]

18. I think if you hang around here for a while, you'll see I'm anything but

"complacent".

What I'm not about to do is get worked up on October 18, 2004 about a hypothetical ballot measure for 2006. Let's see if it gets any traction, shall we, but right now I, for one, have much bigger fish to fry.

Yes, some ballot measures have passed that maybe you or I didn't like. But they don't have anything to do with the issue at hand. The Democratic Majority isn't going to want to dilute the state's power in that way.. It would take me 5 seconds to come up with a counter-argument to the one you raise, i.e. "Why have the powerhouse that is California treated like two smaller states?" You really believe that the big-time Dems in places like Hollywood and SF are going to let something like that fly without a major fight?

And give the voters a little more credit.
Voters have shown general good sense with ballot measures lately. We passed a few very sensible things with regards to the drug war, namely 215 and 36, even though that's an issue that so-called 'mainstream' candidates won't touch for fear of being labled "soft on crime"..

If people want their votes to count, and have California stop being "ignored" by Washington (which, I can't help but notice, is also the central and only argument in Bill Jones's campaign, by the way) the best way to do that is to get new leadership in Washington. Which is what I'm all about right now.

Is this something to be aware of and think about? Yes, and thanks for posting it. But I really, really, think there are bigger things to worry about right now. I'm going to Nevada next weekend for Kerry--- You can call me many things, but I'm not "complacent".

[Pax Argent]

43. This is the same KGO that has Roger Hedgecock

(aka Rush Limbaugh's understudy) on the afternoon drive? I listen occasionally. Maybe I just missed the centrists?

That aside, you are right about the short-sighted meanness of most Californian voters (unfortunately), at least the ones in the rural or suburban areas. Promise them a chance to put the "illegals" in their place or otherwise screw over some other racial group (think Native Americans) and they're on it. They would love to get out from under those evil libruls in Los Angeles and San Fransisco.

[PretzelWarrior]

13. we could do something similar in Texass

if this catches fire and goes through the states....it is a win for the Democrats. We will always win the popular vote and get more of the electoral votes if it were apportioned based on split %s.

Of course, what if 3 candidates essentially tied up a 3rd of votes a piece? Would have power sharing? WOW>

[sandersadu]

15. The problem

Each individual state is different. Some have initiative/ballot process (CA., Washington State), but most don't.

Since CA. is the big enchilada, we should focus on it 1st.

[gardenista]

17. Think. All the Reps have to do is keep the red states as block votes, and

they win the whole enchilada.

[usregimechange]

19. 25 Democratic state senators compared to like 15 pukes, nt

[Yunaleska]

20. This rumor is BS

I wouldn't take it too seriously. Obviously whoever started it has never read the constitution.

The constitution says the STATE LEGISLATURE decides WHO the electors will be for and HOW that is decided.

The constitution provides ABSOLUTELY NO MEANS for a citizen ballot inititive to decide it. It is the state legislature PERIOD.

And considering we have control of the CA legislature I wouldn't worry about this ever happening.

Now - it is possible for the legislature to give its silent approval by doing nothing. (in theory) However, we control the legislature and, again, constitutionally they have the legal right to leave it as it is.

[monchie]

24. I don't know what the CA state constitution says...

...so I have to ask this. Is it possible for a citizens' initiative to amend the constitution without the approval of the legislature?

[Bad Thoughts]

25. CA Constitution is easily amended

It is one of the longest documents because it can be amended by ballot measures.

[Yunaleska]

30. They would need to amend the US constitution

And they have an ice cubes chance in hell of doing it.

[Yunaleska]

29. Actually

I was referring to the US constitution (which clearly states only a state legislature may decide who electors will be for and how they are chosen).

If this was ever to fly it would require an amendment to the US - not the CA state - constitution. A voter initiative has no force what-so-ever. It's up to the state legislature and the state legislature alone. End of story.

The state legislatures derive their power to choose electors from the US constitution. Since when does a voter initiative have the power to override the US constitution and strip a state legislature of the power the constitution grants it? It doesn't - and it's why you can call BS on this rumor immediately.

[monchie]

37. So how does the CO initiative fit in?

Was it approved by the CO legislature before being put on the ballot?

[Yunaleska]

46. Simple

A state legislature has the right to decide ANY way it wants electors to be chosen. IF it allows a citizen initiative to make that call then that is perfectly legal.

However, if the CO legislature wanted to it could decide tomorrow all the electors will be chosen by flip of coin totally overriding any initiative. That would be perfectly constitutional because the legislature is explicitly granted that ability. No one would have any grounds to challenge it, and if they tried the courts would side with the legislature. (There is also already talk in legal circles of a potential legal challenge on constitutional grounds should this happen even if the CO legislature stays mute - however it must happen before such a challenge could occur)

NOW - the question is - would the CA legislature (which is FIRMLY in our hands) allow such a change in it's state? The answer is hell no. Ultimately the state legislature makes the call. It's always been that way - and will be until the US constitution is amended.

[Bad Thoughts]

38. State assemblies can give up their rights

That is why you can vote directly for a Senator.

[Yunaleska]

48. Wrong

We can vote directly for a senator because THE US CONSTITUTION WAS AMENDED TO ALLOW THAT. Christ people - read the constitution and it's amendments. In your case try the 17th amendment. No single state made that call - a great many of them did. Likewise, a great many states would need to address this through constitutional amendment. Not CA by its self.

And, yes, the CA legislature COULD allow a voter initiative to make the call IF it wanted to allow it. It could allow big bird to make the call if so desired. However - what makes you think the CA legislature - which is firmly in our hands - would ever allow this? They have full constitutional authority to make their own decision totally independent of a voter initiative.

Just because something COULD happen doesn't mean it is bloodly likely.

[Bad Thoughts]

51. Please Refrain

Your tone is becoming bothersome

The 17th Amendment was the result of an evolution in state politics in which state legislatures limited their ability to choose whom they would nominate as senators. By the time of the amendment twenty nine states had a primary process in which voters designated their preference--the state assemblies almost always obliged them. In three states the state legislators were sworn to support the voters' choice.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bad Thoughts]

54. Sorry

My post was not meant to be an example of how we should vote for President, but how the rights of state assemblies in national politics are transfered to the people.

[Yunaleska]

57. Only with their consent

however. But the fact is the CA legislature would NEVER consent to this. Comparing it to the 17th amendment (and the history prior to it) is not at all the same situation.

[Yunaleska]

56. Again

What's your point?

We already know the CA legislature could allow a voter initiative to decide how electors will be chosen - if the CA legislature allowed it. They could decide a coin toss if they so wanted. The fact of the matter is, however, they would not do so. It's about as likely as the theory the house will impeach bush.

Guess what? Do you know why the states had to allow voters to nominate (which is essentially what it was) senate candidates rather than directly vote for them prior to the 17th amendment? Because people could not legally (constitutionally) directly vote for them. Likewise people can not directly vote for an elector(s) over the state legislature.

Likewise - if you want voter initiatives to decide electors rather than a state legislature you are going to have to amend the constitution. Otherwise any state - including CA - has the final say over ANY voter initiative.

You are not taking this to its logical end. It seems you are thinking

* 1. Senators could be voted for by popular vote (but still had to be approved by the state) -> 2. Constitional amendment allowed direct vote -> 3. Therefore people can vote directly for senators.

Therefore

* 1. Electors can be decided (winner take all) by popular vote -> 2. Constitional amendment (that does not exist) could allow citizen initiative to decide electors -> 3. Therefore people can directly vote for electors. (Hint: Your logic is missing step 2 here - therefore the concern has no basis in reality, and your comparison is flawed)

So again - what is your point in bringing this up? The facts are

1. Constitutionally the state legislatures have the final say on electors.

2. A voter initiative in CA to do this would require the CA legislature to not overrule them.

3. Considering such inaction would mean permanent minority status of the democratic party there is not a bloody chance in hell the democratic controlled CA legislature would allow it.

[Bad Thoughts]

58. No more

You are twisting my argument. If you care to know what my opinion is, read here. Otherwise I have nothing more to say to you.

[Yunaleska]

59. Thank you for conceeding

.

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bad Thoughts]

21. Gerrymandering

I consider myself to be something of an expert on regionalism, and I think that this is a horrible idea. This would allow state legislators to gerrymander the electoral votes as they do congressional districts. A small state like Maine might get away with it (it only has 4 EVs), but with 50+ some serious corruption could take place.

[monchie]

22. Exactly.

In theory I sort of like the idea of apportioning electoral votes (but only if all states do it). However, when the system of apportionment uses congressional districts, especially in a big state, it leads to all kinds of monkey business.

My old home state of PA is pretty evenly split between Dems and Repugs, but the Repug legislature made sure to give the Repugs a big advantage when they gerrymandered the state.

And think about DeLay's shenanigans in TX.

This is why I hope the CO initiative goes down, even though it would probably give Kerry an electoral vote or two.

[Bad Thoughts]

23. The core of the problem:

Congressional districts are nothings. They are not communities. They have no executive powers. They have no administrative powers. All that they do is say that a particular seat in the Congress is saved for someone within the district. That's all. The borders of each district are easily changed because there is no expense involved.

[dansolo]

32. The EVs should be divided statewide proportionally

I favor having two EVs going to the popular winner, and the remaining EVs to be divided proportionally by the staewide popular vote. Dividing it by congressional districts is even worse than winner-take-all.

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[calmblueocean]

26. We need to get rid of the electoral college altogether.

How do we do that?

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hippo_Tron]

55. I'm actually not ready to give up the EC until we get rid of diebold

Right now it's actually a safeguard on democracy. If we could guarantee fair voting I would be for getting rid of the EC, but right now it's actually a safeguard despite the its undemocratic nature.

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dolstein]

27. Why would Arnold be that stupid?

He'd have a hard enough time getting the Republican nomination in any event. But his strongest argument would be his potential ability to carry California and win its 50+ electoral votes. And let's not forget this -- not too long ago California was a solidly Republican state. The pendulum could always swing back.

[Democat]

28. The right wing will obviously make this move, it's just a matter of time

Whether our side is prepared or whether they just let us get screwed again, like they did with the recall, remains to be seen.

The key would be to get Florida and Texas to do the same. We should not allow California to be split without splitting Texas as well.

This issue should be a federal one, not a state one, because it changes the value of each citizens votes.

How can some states use one system and some use another in a federal election?

It makes no sense and it totally screws up federal elections.

[Guaranteed]

33. The Dems had better have killing that one as their NUMBER ONE

issue.

[Warren DeMontague]

45. Frankly, I'm curious as to why anyone would want to try to get us

worked up about such a hypothetical here when we're 2 weeeks from a crucial election, and many of us Californians are very engaged and participating on a cross-country basis.

Aren't we going to have plenty of time between Nov. 2 and the Kerry inauguration to worry about this? Why the urge to get people to expend such energy about a hypothetical 2006 ballot initiative that exists only to the extent that it was allegedly mentioned on a radio station?

I mean, come on.

[Yunaleska]

64. Exactly

And people need to realize such an initiative - if even possible - would NEVER pass CA voters anyway.

People are worried because the recall happened. They need to realize the recall was a special case. If the governor was not VERY unpopular with both republicans AND enough democrats to matter the repugs recall scheme would never have been successful. The repugs saw the blood in the water and like the creeps they are took full advantage of the situation.

Anyway - it was a special case. It won't ever be the case again. There is little need to worry about it - especially something they "might" try 2-4 years from now.

[knight_of_the_star]

53. We've got time

Don't worry, IF it makes it past being an idea, we'll be ready to shoot it down. That and Ahnuld hasn't really done much in office as to fulfilling his campaign promises, I don't think he'll be able to push this solidly enough to make it happen and still hold Sacremento.

[Bad Thoughts]

44. Apportioning Colorado's EVs

This article describes how the process in Colorado might be changed (ballot initiative) and how the votes will be apportioned according to the popular vote.